Senate Bill 722: Nutritional Supplements Would Be Banned



S

Steve Bayt

Guest
STEVE BAYT (Parma/Brook Park, Ohio)

This group keeps asking some great questions, except for the guy who is promoting masturbation to
save your life.

But, all you people seem to be in denial of the worst thing to all your health. That is Illinois'
Senator Durbin's Senate Bill 722 which would lead to the elimination of all health foods.

The same standards which SB 722 seeks to employ on nutritional supplements is the same as used by
FDA regulated prescription drugs.

The only media which seems to be dealing with SB 722 is the magazine Health Start Today, which is
mostly available to Vitamin World customers, which is just about the only Health Food store actively
lobbying against SB 722. GNC dosen't even have a link to the capwiz.com site hosting a complete
guide for those interested in lobbying against SB 722.

In this months issue, the publisher has revealed probably the best argument against SB 722.
According to the CDC on average 106,000 Americans die due to unsafe prescription drugs. Last year
brought forth the average of 2.1 million Americans hospitalized due to prescription drugs. And
according to CDC and The Journal of Medicine that 2.1 million is only 10% of those who were "911'ed"
to hospitals. It dosen't include possibly up to 18 million more Americans who just suffered without
wanting to go to the hospital for even more drugs.

Yet, over the last 25 years, each year has had no more than 5 deaths due to Nutritional supplements
and in the entire history of nutritional supplements according to Frontline, only 7,000 people have
ever been hospitalized due to nutritional supplements.

Using what is called by marketers, "estimation by analogy" SB 722 will send more people to hospitals
in a month for supplement use then have ever been admittted to hospitals.

Other articles of mine can be found by doing a google newsgroup search under Senate Bill 722.

Whenever I post to cleveland.com/forums they delete my postings in particular the health forums. I
am asking that people in this (these) groups to copy and paste either my articles or others' to
cleveland.com/forums. Then keep going to Senators a capwiz.com where one also do media outlets.

For anyone who has either contacted anyone about SB 722 please let's start a thread for what
people have done, either online, regular advertising or even telling others like I do in all my
college classes.

If SB 722 isn't defeated all the questions in this (these) groups will have no meaning for one won't
be able to act on them anyway. And Senator Durbin if successful with what should be called "The
American Health Crisis Act of 2003"
 
E

Eric Bohlman

Guest
[email protected] (Steve Bayt) wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> But, all you people seem to be in denial of the worst thing to all your health. That is Illinois'
> Senator Durbin's Senate Bill 722 which would lead to the elimination of all health foods.
>
> The same standards which SB 722 seeks to employ on nutritional supplements is the same as used by
> FDA regulated prescription drugs.

For those coming in late, the only "nutritional supplements" that would actually be regulated under
this bill would be those that contain anabolic steroids or their precursors. For everything else,
the only requirement would be that manufacturers who received reports of adverse effects from
nutritional supplements would have to forward copies of those reports to the FDA. In no way would
manufacturers of nutritional supplements be required to put their products through the new drug
approval process; the bill wouldn't even require manufacturers of supplements to follow good
manufacturing practices.

Once again, the "health foods" Bayt is talking about are steroid pills.
 
J

Jan

Guest
>Subject: Re: Senate Bill 722: Nutritional Supplements Would Be Banned
>From: Eric Bohlman [email protected]
>Date: 1/29/2004 4:14 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <[email protected]>
>
>[email protected] (Steve Bayt) wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
>> But, all you people seem to be in denial of the worst thing to all your health. That is Illinois'
>> Senator Durbin's Senate Bill 722 which would lead to the elimination of all health foods.
>>
>> The same standards which SB 722 seeks to employ on nutritional supplements is the same as used by
>> FDA regulated prescription drugs.
>
>For those coming in late, the only "nutritional supplements" that would actually be regulated under
>this bill would be those that contain anabolic steroids or their precursors. For everything else,
>the only requirement would be that manufacturers who received reports of adverse effects from
>nutritional supplements would have to forward copies of those reports to the FDA. In no way would
>manufacturers of nutritional supplements be required to put their products through the new drug
>approval process; the bill wouldn't even require manufacturers of supplements to follow good
>manufacturing practices.
>
>Once again, the "health foods" Bayt is talking about are steroid pills.

It called getting one foot in the door, before the kill.

Jan
 
D

David Wright

Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
Steve Bayt <[email protected]> wrote:
>STEVE BAYT (Parma/Brook Park, Ohio)
>
>
>This group keeps asking some great questions, except for the guy who is promoting masturbation to
>save your life.

But the biggest and best questions are ones like "Who the hell is Steve Bayt and why is he on this
insane crusade against Durbin's bill, about which he keeps making baseless assertions? And why is
his stupid mailbox on Yahoo always full?"

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always
correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my
shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)
 
M

M Nesbitt

Guest
[email protected] (Jan) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> >Subject: Re: Senate Bill 722: Nutritional Supplements Would Be Banned From: Eric Bohlman
> >[email protected] Date: 1/29/2004 9:34 PM Pacific Standard Time Message-id:
> ><[email protected]>
> >
> >[email protected] (Jan) wrote in news:[email protected]:
> >
> >>>Once again, the "health foods" Bayt is talking about are steroid pills.
> >>
> >> It called getting one foot in the door, before the kill.
> >
> >http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/slippery-slope.html
>
> Sorry, you have no common sense, or know anything about history.
>
> In your quest to protect organized medicine.
>
> Jan

If you folks are interested, there's a nice piece of legislation now in effect in Canada that will,
I think, help the legitimate alternative therapy folks. It will make outfits that make claims prove
them, will insist on the same quality control for supplements that exist for medical products, and
will track adverse reactions the same way it's done with medications. It will not insist on double
bling studies or impose huge financial burdens on small companies that want to sell nutritional
products. But it will insist that any claims be backed up with evidence. It will also mean that
those wising to take feverfew, or echinacea, or any other supplement, will know that the labelling
reflects what's in the bottle, which right now is not a sure thing.

Anyway, there's almost no uproar up here over this legislation, so perhaps we're doing
something right.

Here are the new regulations.

http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpfb-dgpsa/nhpd-dpsn/index_e.html

m nesbitt Cynical Optimist
 
M

Mark Probertjan

Guest
"Jan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >Subject: Re: Senate Bill 722: Nutritional Supplements Would Be Banned From: Eric Bohlman
> >[email protected] Date: 1/29/2004 4:14 PM Pacific Standard Time Message-id:
> ><[email protected]>
> >
> >[email protected] (Steve Bayt) wrote in news:[email protected]:
> >
> >> But, all you people seem to be in denial of the worst thing to all your health. That is
> >> Illinois' Senator Durbin's Senate Bill 722 which would lead to the elimination of all health
> >> foods.
> >>
> >> The same standards which SB 722 seeks to employ on nutritional supplements is the same as used
> >> by FDA regulated prescription drugs.
> >
> >For those coming in late, the only "nutritional supplements" that would actually be regulated
> >under this bill would be those that contain
anabolic
> >steroids or their precursors. For everything else, the only requirement would be that
> >manufacturers who received reports of adverse effects from nutritional supplements would have to
> >forward copies of those reports to the FDA. In no way would manufacturers of nutritional
> >supplements be required to put their products through the new drug approval process; the bill
> >wouldn't even require manufacturers of supplements to follow good manufacturing practices.
> >
> >Once again, the "health foods" Bayt is talking about are steroid pills.
>
> It called getting one foot in the door, before the kill.

Actually, Jan, the purpose of the bill is to mandate that the supplement manufacturers forward
adverse event reports to the FDA for monitoring purposes. You see, the FDA had to figuratively "pull
teeth" to get enough information on Ephedra before they could evalaute its current use so they could
make a decision as to whether it is safe in the marketplace.

Now, I will assume that you know that anabolic steroids or their precursors are dangerous chemcials
when used in an unregulated manner. Thus, I am certain you favor caution in their use.
 
M

Mark Probertjan

Guest
"m nesbitt" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] (Jan) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > >Subject: Re: Senate Bill 722: Nutritional Supplements Would Be Banned From: Eric Bohlman
> > >[email protected] Date: 1/29/2004 9:34 PM Pacific Standard Time Message-id:
> > ><[email protected]>
> > >
> > >[email protected] (Jan) wrote in news:[email protected]:
> > >
> > >>>Once again, the "health foods" Bayt is talking about are steroid pills.
> > >>
> > >> It called getting one foot in the door, before the kill.
> > >
> > >http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/slippery-slope.html
> >
> > Sorry, you have no common sense, or know anything about history.
> >
> > In your quest to protect organized medicine.
> >
> > Jan
>
> If you folks are interested, there's a nice piece of legislation now in effect in Canada that
> will, I think, help the legitimate alternative therapy folks. It will make outfits that make
> claims prove them, will insist on the same quality control for supplements that exist for medical
> products, and will track adverse reactions the same way it's done with medications.

Dear m:

That sounds wonderful. The "debunkers" here have been wanting the same form of legislation in the
USA for years, ever since DSHEA was passed by Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) who had a financial stake in the
industry. Simply put;

One standard for anything to be used as a medicine.

> It will not insist on double bling studies or impose huge financial burdens on small companies
> that want to sell nutritional products. But it will insist that any claims be backed up with
> evidence. It will also mean that those wising to take feverfew, or echinacea, or any other
> supplement, will know that the labelling reflects what's in the bottle, which right now is not a
> sure thing.

Again, a wonderful thing. One of the problems with the ephedra deaths and adverse events was that
there was poor qulaity control and the actual doseage per tablet ranged from 0 to 3-4X label.

> Anyway, there's almost no uproar up here over this legislation, so perhaps we're doing
> something right.

You must import a lot of it from Utah. If the local economy relied on it, the money makers would be
in an uproar.

> Here are the new regulations.
>
> http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpfb-dgpsa/nhpd-dpsn/index_e.html
>
> m nesbitt Cynical Optimist

I would say that in this area, I am a cynical pessimist, since there is so much money being made by
the lack of regulation.
 
M

Mark Probertjan

Guest
"David Wright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:p[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, Steve Bayt
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >STEVE BAYT (Parma/Brook Park, Ohio)
> >
> >
> >This group keeps asking some great questions, except for the guy who is promoting masturbation to
> >save your life.
>
> But the biggest and best questions are ones like "Who the hell is Steve Bayt

I did a search on him. I did find one VERY interesting article (SPLORF alert)

http://www.curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=237&i=376

and why is he on this insane crusade against Durbin's bill,
> about which he keeps making baseless assertions?

And why is his
> stupid mailbox on Yahoo always full?"

http://www.cyclingforums.com/showthread/t-74615.html
 
D

David Wright

Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
Mark ProbertJanuary 30, 2004 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>"David Wright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:p[email protected]...
>> In article <[email protected]>, Steve Bayt
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >STEVE BAYT (Parma/Brook Park, Ohio)
>> >
>> >This group keeps asking some great questions, except for the guy who is promoting masturbation
>> >to save your life.
>>
>> But the biggest and best questions are ones like "Who the hell is Steve Bayt
>
>I did a search on him. I did find one VERY interesting article (SPLORF alert)
>
>http://www.curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=237&i=376

Hilarious! For those who lack the inclination to check the link, Bayt is complaining about gLowlife
Dave, our favorite ginseng spammer, reposting one of Bayt's anti-HR722 articles without attribution.

>> and why is he on this insane crusade against Durbin's bill, about which he keeps making baseless
>> assertions?
>
>
>> And why is his stupid mailbox on Yahoo always full?"
>
>http://www.cyclingforums.com/showthread/t-74615.html

Claims he's being spammed and can't keep the box clear. How tragic.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always
correct. "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my
shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)
 
M

Mark Probertjan

Guest
"David Wright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>, Mark ProbertJanuary 30, 2004 <MarkProbert1-30-
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >"David Wright" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:p[email protected]...
> >> In article <[email protected]>, Steve Bayt <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >> >STEVE BAYT (Parma/Brook Park, Ohio)
> >> >
> >> >This group keeps asking some great questions, except for the guy who is promoting masturbation
> >> >to save your life.
> >>
> >> But the biggest and best questions are ones like "Who the hell is Steve Bayt
> >
> >I did a search on him. I did find one VERY interesting article (SPLORF alert)
> >
> >http://www.curezone.com/forums/m.asp?f=237&i=376
>
> Hilarious! For those who lack the inclination to check the link, Bayt is complaining about
> gLowlife Dave, our favorite ginseng spammer, reposting one of Bayt's anti-HR722 articles without
> attribution.

I just knew you would appreciate it.

> >> and why is he on this insane crusade against Durbin's bill, about which he keeps making
> >> baseless assertions?
> >
> >
> >> And why is his stupid mailbox on Yahoo always full?"
> >
> >http://www.cyclingforums.com/showthread/t-74615.html
>
> Claims he's being spammed and can't keep the box clear. How tragic.

Yep.
 
D

Drceephd

Guest
Eric Bohlman <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> [email protected] (Steve Bayt) wrote in news:[email protected]:
>
> > But, all you people seem to be in denial of the worst thing to all your health. That is
> > Illinois' Senator Durbin's Senate Bill 722 which would lead to the elimination of all health
> > foods.
> >
> > The same standards which SB 722 seeks to employ on nutritional supplements is the same as used
> > by FDA regulated prescription drugs.
>
> For those coming in late, the only "nutritional supplements" that would actually be regulated
> under this bill would be those that contain anabolic steroids or their precursors. For everything
> else, the only requirement would be that manufacturers who received reports of adverse effects
> from nutritional supplements would have to forward copies of those reports to the FDA. In no way
> would manufacturers of nutritional supplements be required to put their products through the new
> drug approval process; the bill wouldn't even require manufacturers of supplements to follow good
> manufacturing practices.
>
> Once again, the "health foods" Bayt is talking about are steroid pills.

Not according to this reporter:

in December, there will most certainly be added momentum in 2004 to pass legislation introduced in
the Congress that would "http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/dshea.htm" the hard fought 1994 DSHEA
(Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act) law that has largely exempted supplements from
excessive FDA regulation. The Senate version, "http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-
bin/bdquery/z?d108:s.00722:", is sponsored by Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) and is co-sponsored by Sen.
Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY).

Isn't it interesting that HRC is a co-sponsor??

I wonder why?

DrC PhD
 
M

Mark Probertfeb

Guest
"drceephd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Eric Bohlman <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
> > [email protected] (Steve Bayt) wrote in news:[email protected]:
> >
> > > But, all you people seem to be in denial of the worst thing to all your health. That is
> > > Illinois' Senator Durbin's Senate Bill 722 which would lead to the elimination of all health
> > > foods.
> > >
> > > The same standards which SB 722 seeks to employ on nutritional supplements is the same as used
> > > by FDA regulated prescription drugs.
> >
> > For those coming in late, the only "nutritional supplements" that would actually be regulated
> > under this bill would be those that contain
anabolic
> > steroids or their precursors. For everything else, the only requirement would be that
> > manufacturers who received reports of adverse effects from nutritional supplements would have to
> > forward copies of those reports to the FDA. In no way would manufacturers of nutritional
> > supplements be required to put their products through the new drug approval process;
the
> > bill wouldn't even require manufacturers of supplements to follow good manufacturing practices.
> >
> > Once again, the "health foods" Bayt is talking about are steroid pills.
>
> Not according to this reporter:
>
> in December, there will most certainly be added momentum in 2004 to pass legislation introduced in
> the Congress that would "http://www4.dr-rath-foundation.org/dshea.htm" the hard fought 1994 DSHEA
> (Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act) law that has largely exempted supplements from
> excessive FDA regulation. The Senate version, "http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-
> bin/bdquery/z?d108:s.00722:", is sponsored by Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) and is co-sponsored by
> Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY), Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY).
>
> Isn't it interesting that HRC is a co-sponsor??
>
> I wonder why?

She is a very intelligent woman who has been personally involved withthe family of one of the
victims of ephedra.